The recent pause in U.S. weapons deliveries to Ukraine, including some 30 Patriot missiles, has Russian officials openly questioning the willingness—and ability—of the United States to support a key ally.
The Kremlin’s top spokesman greeted the recent decision gleefully: “The industry can’t make missiles in necessary quantities fast enough, especially as there were obviously many shipments to Israel as well, and deliveries to Ukraine are continuing”, said Dmitry Peskov.
Kirill Dmitriev, the CEO of Russia’s direct investment bank, said on Telegram, “Such a move raises questions about the West’s real ability to continue supporting Ukraine—and about the priorities of American defense policy itself.”
The pause in aid has alarmed not only Ukrainians but also analysts and former U.S. officials. While Peskov has claimed that the fewer interceptors Ukraine has, “the nearer the end of the special military operation is,” Russia’s actions point to the contrary.
Moscow has been ramping up its missile attacks on Ukraine—against military and civilian targets. Konrad Muzyka of the Rochan Consulting in Poland told the New York Times at the end of June that Russia would likely exceed 5,000 launches that month.
An assessment from the Institute for the Study of War on Wednesday concluded the pause will work as a gift to Putin. “Reducing U.S. military aid to Ukraine will neither lead to a sustainable peace in Ukraine nor compel Russian President Vladimir Putin to reassess his theory of victory,” they wrote. “Putin’s theory of victory posits that the Russian military can sustain creeping, incremental advances on the battlefield longer than Ukrainian forces can defend, and longer than the West is willing to support Ukraine.”
The White House and Pentagon say the pause is necessary in order to conduct a review of current U.S. stockpiles. Patriot missiles in particular have been critical to Ukraine’s defense against Russian attacks, but they are in high demand.
Some former officials have questioned the necessity of the move.
In a New York Times op-ed Thursday, former National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan blasted the pause and its justification in terms of military readiness. Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative “deliveries—the main target of the pause—are sourced from procurement contracts, not from the Pentagon’s stockpiles, and are distinct from orders for the U.S. military,” he wrote, pointing out that the White House has used “congressional funding to replace what it sends with newer munitions, which actually strengthens the U.S. military.”
Military analyst Colby Badhwar on X supported that point Thursday, calling Ukraine’s needs—which include the 30 Patriots but also GMLRS precision rockets, munitions and Hellfire anti-tank missiles—“modest” compared to overall Defense Department overall readiness goals.
Badhwar goes on to accuse Elbridge Colby—the current under secretary of defense for policy and apparent proponent of the pause—of “deliberately sabotaging both Ukraine and the entire Department of Defense.”
Long before his current role in the Trump administration, Colby spent years distinguishing himself from other foreign and defense policy thinkers by arguing the United States was over-invested in Ukraine’s survival, and not invested enough in deterring Chinese military action against Taiwan.
But even very staunch defenders of Ukraine point out that demand for weapons, particularly Patriots, is growing faster than supply. A RAND analysis from November notes the U.S. could take from “active inventories” to cover shortfalls in production, though such a move is risk. Still, the analysis states, “Increased domestic production combined with a more effective Ukrainian force assuages this risk.”
NATO’s support and procurement agency placed a $5.6 billion order for Patriot missiles and related components in January, but those deliveries will not start until 2027.
And the U.S. Army is also looking to increase its acquisition of Patriots, seeking increased funding not only for the interceptors themselves but also to ramp up the capacity to build them.
Whether the United States can spare 30 Patriot missiles—among other weapons aid—right now depends greatly on how large a threat to Ukraine and Europe Vladimir Putin really is. But there is little agreement on that answer.
“The respective threat assessments here in Europe versus back in Washington are further apart than they have been in any time, perhaps since the end of the Cold War. And I think that is very disconcerting,” Brian Finlay, the Stimson Center’s president & chief executive officer, said at the GLOBSEC Security Forum in Prague in June. “I think that the new administration has a fundamentally different perception of risk and threat than here in Europe, and throughout the history of the transplanted relationship, again, since the end of the Cold War.”
